Solar neighborhoods: the impact of urban layout on a large-scale solar strategies application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article addresses the challenges of evaluating energy performance in different neighborhood settings under various energy efficiency measures and proposes a methodology for selecting appropriate solar strategies on a neighborhood scale. The study selects five representative neighborhoods from various climatic zones with different building and street layouts. The proposed methodology involves a systematic three-step multi-domain workflow for implementing energy efficiency measures and solar strategies in the existing neighborhoods. The first step involves typical energy performance simulation, the second step involves energy simulation using high performance building envelope, and the third step involves the addition of solar strategies in combination with retrofitting materials to achieve net-zero status. The results of the study show that modifying the building envelope leads to a significant reduction in energy consumption, with up to 60% reduction observed. The study also finds that the optimal mix of solar strategies depends strongly on the type of neighborhood, its street layouts, and the type of buildings. The article highlights the importance of considering these factors when implementing solar strategies on a neighborhood scale to achieve energy efficiency and net-zero status. It provides urban planners with a systematic decision-making approach to evaluate and optimize neighborhoods to achieve net-zero energy status.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".